|
|
Post by rational on Jan 30, 2016 3:22:27 GMT -5
I am at peace being me (well as much as a human can be). I don't have any choice regarding my belief in a deity or deities. Umfolozi said:The beauty of being a human is that we can reason and therefore have a choice. But I am glad that you say you are at peace.I think you are wrong. Could anything make you believe in elves? Could anything make you disbelieve in god? There are a number of things that are unanswered for theists yet you don't discount that theory. If you want an answer regarding what you think are missing facts perhaps asking them would shed light. I have a feeling your sources have not presented you with an accurate view of things. It is like explaining that gravity works because things like each other and want to be close. This is just a restatement of Pascal's Wager. It has a number of flaws. The major one is wouldn't a god know that someone was believing just to hedge their bet on an afterlife? And then the is the issue that with the thousands of gods what are the chances you have discovered the right one? The people of Egypt thought they had the right god for centuries. Doesn't look so good for them now. And in 10,000 years what god(s) will be in favor? I tried to see the intelligent design in the children born with birth defects. On the news today there was a report of a couple who kept their children locked in the bathroom/basement for weeks at a time. Who designed the parents? A quarter of million people died following the earthquake in the Indian ocean - while I am certain the tsunami was a thing of beauty the aftermath probably took away from that. The point is that things happen. Good things and bad things. Had you witnessed a tornado killing people would you still have given credit to god? Or would that have been a force of nature. Sounds fair. When you are wandering around consider that some of the things you see cannot be considered intelligent design. |
|
|
|
Post by Who's to say? on Jan 30, 2016 3:36:04 GMT -5
Maybe evolution is creation??
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 30, 2016 3:46:48 GMT -5
Maybe evolution is creation?? I know that many of the creationist sites are often confused about this. |
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on Jan 30, 2016 4:25:34 GMT -5
I think you are wrong. Could anything make you believe in elves? Could anything make you disbelieve in god? There are a number of things that are unanswered for theists yet you don't discount that theory. If you want an answer regarding what you think are missing facts perhaps asking them would shed light. I have a feeling your sources have not presented you with an accurate view of things. It is like explaining that gravity works because things like each other and want to be close. This is just a restatement of Pascal's Wager. It has a number of flaws. The major one is wouldn't a god know that someone was believing just to hedge their bet on an afterlife? And then the is the issue that with the thousands of gods what are the chances you have discovered the right one? The people of Egypt thought they had the right god for centuries. Doesn't look so good for them now. And in 10,000 years what god(s) will be in favor? I tried to see the intelligent design in the children born with birth defects. On the news today there was a report of a couple who kept their children locked in the bathroom/basement for weeks at a time. Who designed the parents? A quarter of million people died following the earthquake in the Indian ocean - while I am certain the tsunami was a thing of beauty the aftermath probably took away from that. The point is that things happen. Good things and bad things. Had you witnessed a tornado killing people would you still have given credit to god? Or would that have been a force of nature. Sounds fair. When you are wandering around consider that some of the things you see cannot be considered intelligent design. Quote: It has a number of flaws. The major one is wouldn't a god know that someone was believing just to hedge their bet on an afterlife? And then the is the issue that with the thousands of gods what are the chances you have discovered the right one? The people of Egypt thought they had the right god for centuries. Doesn't look so good for them now. And in 10,000 years what god(s) will be in favor? Yes God would know if someone is just following to "hedge their bet on an afterlife" as you put it, that's why it's so important that we follow what Jesus told us, that we must deny ourselves. Once we start to deny ourselves, then we are giving our hearts to God. To show him we truly love him we must live for him and obey him do his will not our own, and follow Jesus. It's easy to say were eternally saved and I'm ok, it's totally different living it out and suffering by denying our own sins and forgiving the persecutions of others toward us. When God sees us truly loving him and denying ourselves, he then gives us the strength of the holy spirit to overcome these things. Jesus denied everything and never sinned, so he received the spirit fully. He was in the image of God, he was God with us, and he is now exalted above all that is in heaven. He overcame Satan right up until his last breath and he will help us to do this too. He came by example and showed us the way. He is the truth and the life. God is love, (as you know I believe) and he's the only God we need to know and he is the almighty God. All love within us is from God. And the stronger we are in the spirit, the more our own life goes, and the more Gods love grows within us. Jesus told us the greatest commandments were to love the lord our God with all our hearts, minds, soul and strength and our neighbour as ourselves. What wisdom! If we follow those 2 commandments it covers everything because love conquers all. I think about the good Samaritan, he didn't say to the man that he helped. What did you do wrong or I'm not helping you as you don't believe like me or that he didn't like him. He just helped, regardless of who he was. And that's what we should do. If were see the need, then we show the love of God in our hearts and reach out to anyone in need. No matter what we think. This is the love of the one true God Rational, and he is the only God that we should worship. |
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Jan 30, 2016 5:11:45 GMT -5
Where do we come from ? Well my opinion evolution is based on theories lies and gaping holes (insurmountable gaps and misleading data) Intelligent design is based on common sense , truth, and zero gaps! Jmho.  ?
I also think that if you were to become ill that you would no doubt go to a modern physician and hospital where the care is based on science which is also based on evolution.
Perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe you would go a witch doctor instead. peculiar universes by Halton Arp Intrinsic red shift observations Let's just face the truth about the universe? There is evidence that contradicts the theory of the Big Bang But if you're a scientist they don't want you to expose it |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 30, 2016 5:28:45 GMT -5
Perhaps you need to study the subject of evolution some more and also understand the difference in "scientific theory" as opposed to the term "theory" in the usual definition.
I also think that if you were to become ill that you would no doubt go to a modern physician and hospital where the care is based on science which is also based on evolution.
Perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe you would go a witch doctor instead. Intrinsic red shift observations Let's just face the truth about the universe? There is evidence that contradicts the theory of the Big Bang But if you're a scientist they don't want you to expose it
Your information from Arp is about 55 years old.
Let's come up to the present 2016
Arp originally proposed his theories in the 1960s; telescopes and astronomical instrumentation have advanced greatly since then: the Hubble Space Telescope was launched, multiple 8-10 meter telescopes (such as those at Keck Observatory and the Very Large Telescope) have become operational, and detectors such as CCDs are now more widely employed.
These new telescopes and new instrumentation have been used to examine QSOs further. QSOs are now generally accepted to be very distant galaxies with high redshifts.
Many imaging surveys, most notably the Hubble Deep Field, have found many high-redshift objects that are not QSOs but that appear to be normal galaxies like those found nearby.[9]
The spectra of the high-redshift galaxies, as seen from X-ray to radio wavelengths, match the spectra of nearby galaxies (particularly galaxies with high levels of star formation activity but also galaxies with normal or extinguished star formation activity) when corrected for redshift effects.[10][11][12]
As more recent experiments have expanded the amount of collected data by orders of magnitude, it has become increasingly simple to test Arp's postulates directly. A recent study stated that:
"... the publicly available data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and 2dF QSO redshift survey to test the hypothesis that QSOs are ejected from active galaxies with periodic noncosmological redshifts. For two different intrinsic redshift models, [...] and find there is no evidence for a periodicity at the predicted frequency in log(1+z), or at any other frequency."[13]
from wiki
Why do you think that scientists would not expose something that wasn't true?
That is their life's work!
They wouldn't keep a lid on something like that!
You know Astronomers are scientists.
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 30, 2016 9:28:00 GMT -5
Yes God would know if someone is just following to "hedge their bet on an afterlife" as you put it, that's why it's so important that we follow what Jesus told us, that we must deny ourselves. Once we start to deny ourselves, then we are giving our hearts to God. To show him we truly love him we must live for him and obey him do his will not our own, and follow Jesus. You do realize that this would mean, for me at least, that I would have to lie or perhaps have a lobotomy to do as you suggest. It would be equivalent of me asking you to give up all and follow the commands and desires of Ra, the Egyptian sun god. So you believe Jesus is/was god and has been showing men how to live since the creation? Imagine how many Egyptians thought this about the god they served.But not an original thought. Shouldn't the credit go to the person who first expressed the idea of the ethic of reciprocity. The Egyptians were teaching and following this about 2,000 years before Jesus recorded the thought.Again, this is not an original idea.Again, not an original idea. And Jesus did tell his followers that if they went somewhere and people did not listen to them or welcome them they should shake the dust from their feet and walk away. Not really an example of unquestioning help. However these are your beliefs. We just look at the claims you make from different points of view. [/quote] |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2016 10:23:56 GMT -5
Maybe evolution is creation?? Yes maybe it is ? We have to remember that one day is like a thousand years to the God of the Bible and visa versa. Time is a man made thing and does not control God. So can we take the 6 day's in Genesis literally, I don't know ? I read my Bible like I would eat fish. The bones I leave one side and the rest I eat  . |
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Jan 30, 2016 10:30:26 GMT -5
peculiar universes by Halton ArpIntrinsic red shift observations Let's just face the truth about the universe? There is evidence that contradicts the theory of the Big Bang But if you're a scientist they don't want you to expose it
Your information from Arp is about 55 years old.
for a periodicity at the predicted frequency in log(1+z), or at any other frequency."[/i][13] from wiki
Why do you think that scientists would not expose something that wasn't true?
That is their life's work!
They wouldn't keep a lid on something like that!
You know Astronomers are scientists.
[/font][/b][/font][/quote] Dr Halton Arp continued his observations and wrote. : Seeing Red by Dr Halton Arp in 1998 (At least it is far more current than his original book, and Dr Arp was entitled to have an opinion about what he observed, but even now there is more observation that will continue to perplex the original Big Bang theory) |
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Jan 30, 2016 11:12:04 GMT -5
Survival instincts? Yes we have to eat in order to survive! So let us observe historical patterns in order to make valid predictions for the future. The first micro organisms fed off nonliving matter then as things got more complex the more complex ate the less complex things then we see plants feeding on minerals,etc then animals feeding on plants and animals feeding on other animals and human beings devouring anything that they so desire . So survival is so important to us Needless to say, the earths appetite is the law of the universe and she gobbles up absolutely every living thing she comes in contact with? right? So yes our bodies came from the earth and will One day return to it, but what pray tell to our recorded thoughts ? Will there be a eternal home for them as well, will my blogs still exist in cyberspace? Hmmm ?? |
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Jan 30, 2016 11:21:53 GMT -5
So is cyberspace real?
Is it theoretically infinite and thus larger than our
knowable universe?
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 30, 2016 11:27:50 GMT -5
Where do we come from ? Well my opinion evolution is based on theories lies and gaping holes (insurmountable gaps and misleading data) Perhaps you could point some of the lies and holes for the benefit of readers. Having zero gaps and plugging gaps with the "god of the gaps" is a very different thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Jan 30, 2016 11:49:47 GMT -5
Well let's see
Let's begin with the hypothesis of evolution
there are millions of problems with it that
are swept under the rug that if acknowledged
would support not only a perceived design
but an interacting design (read Dr Don Johnson analysis )
If it is false it is deceiving call it what you will
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 30, 2016 15:33:48 GMT -5
Dr Halton Arp continued his observations and wrote. : Seeing Red by Dr Halton Arp in 1998 (At least it is far more current than his original book, and Dr Arp was entitled to have an opinion about what he observed, but even now there is more observation that will continue to perplex the original Big Bang theory) [/quote]
I am sorry, but you are mixing "theories" with "opinions."
Of course, everyone has a right to their opinion!
Even those that believe in FLAT earth!
Or Nathan's belief in a HOLLOW earth.
However, science just doesn't work that way!
Dr. Arp got many awards from the scientific community for his work in his day.
However, scientists always know that what knowledge from research that they gather will be added to as other scientists coming from behind them will have better tools with which to observe that material.
That is just how science works.
As far as the BIG BANG theory, -scientists are working their way along that research. |
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Jan 30, 2016 15:42:55 GMT -5
Another name: Spike Pssaris
(btw he use to be atheist , )
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Jan 30, 2016 15:50:04 GMT -5
So is cyberspace real? Is it theoretically infinite and thus larger than our knowable universe? It is so big that all the multiverses fit in a corner of |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 30, 2016 16:41:39 GMT -5
Well let's see Let's begin with the hypothesis of evolution there are millions of problems with it that are swept under the rug that if acknowledged would support not only a perceived design but an interacting design (read Dr Don Johnson analysis ) If it is false it is deceiving call it what you will
I find a Donald Johanson a paleontologist from my own neck of the woods, -one of those who find the fossil of "Lucy.," but not a Don Johnson who might be associated with evolutionary science.
??
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Jan 30, 2016 16:49:46 GMT -5
Dr Donald Johnson holds doctorates in : information science and
Physical science .
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 30, 2016 17:02:43 GMT -5
Another name: Spike Pssaris (btw he use to be atheist , )  just shows that even good people go bad.
This article is from the magazine Discover.
Bad Astronomy
Tag: Spike Psarris
Creationists still can't seem to evolve
By Phil Plait | October 11, 2010 12:30 pm
Creationists make me laugh (at least, when they aren’t making me beat my head against a wall).
Sometimes their tactics adapt — dare I say evolve? — to new situations (like when they changed their name from creationism to Intelligent Design), and sometimes they don’t.
Cherry-picking, taking things out of context, and deception are de rigueur for many of them.
smbc_evolution Enter creationists Bob Enyart and Fred Williams.
The former is the host (and the latter a guest host) of a creationist radio program called — hang on to your irony gland — Real Science Friday.
On the October 8 show, they tackle (well, try to tackle) several issues about science, including one involving me.
I downloaded the episode and listened to it, and wasn’t terribly surprised to hear them grossly mischaracterize science all through it.
They manage to pack a whole lot of outright wrongness into just a few minutes; anyone who has passed middle school science would be able to see where they’re wrong.
It’s the usual tour-de-force of creationist nonsense.
Which brings us to me.
Last year, I took creationist Spike Psarris to task for misusing the term "evolution" when it comes to astronomy.
Psarris has a series of videos out about creationist astronomy.
In them, he uses the term evolution to stir emotions in creationists, and not for what it actually means.
He then tried to squirm out of that, saying astronomers use the term evolution all the time
I then showed where he was being very deceptive there, trying to distract his readers away from the point that he was seriously misusing the term.
Re-enter Enyart and Williams. Starting at 18:45 in their radio show, they talk about this.
Of course, they praise Psarris (who is wrong, wrong, wrong), but then turn to my own blog posts about him.
Oh wait, did I say "posts", plural?
I meant they turn to my first blog post.
That’s important; we’ll get back to that.
Read More
CATEGORIZED UNDER: Antiscience, Astronomy, Debunking, Piece of mind, Religion, Science, Skepticism
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 30, 2016 17:35:35 GMT -5
Dr Donald Johnson holds doctorates in : information science and Physical science .
Book Review by Luke Nix, a Computer Systems Administrator in Oklahoma, USA. on Apologetics 315
Reviewers ThoughtsBeing a student of computer science (and information science, to some extent by implication) this book directly addressed my realm of formal training. That made it quite an exciting read. Johnson laid out his case succinctly. He did limit the scope of the book to being critical of naturalistic explanations and did not provide a positive case for God or a designer. While this may be seen as a disadvantage of the book, that makes it ideal to place in the hands of a naturalist because it removes the temptation to avoid the scientific critiques in the book and focus on other arguments or complaints about the conclusion. Of course, throughout the book the positive case for a designer is implied, but it is never explicitly concluded. The apologist could easily discern and articulate this positive case if the skeptic came to accept the critiques offered in the book.
Now, -What's the goal of Apologetics 315?
"T he vision of Apologetics 315 is to provide educational resources for the defense of the Christian faith, with the goal of strengthening the faith of believers and engaging the questions and challenges of other worldviews. By providing an accessible and growing repository of teaching materials, as well as providing a means of networking withi n the apologetics community, we hope to be a significant educational resource for churches, campus groups, and Christians around the world."` Evolution isn't just another "worldview". Evolution is the world wide scientific view by all scientists no matter what part of the world that they happen to be.I have most often found that one cannot just read something and believe it as if it were true.
One has to investigate the source of the information and the motives underlying the conclusions.
This was one of those times when such a continued search was well worth doing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Humm on Jan 30, 2016 19:32:16 GMT -5
Perhaps you need to study the subject of evolution some more and also understand the difference in "scientific theory" as opposed to the term "theory" in the usual definition.
I also think that if you were to become ill that you would no doubt go to a modern physician and hospital where the care is based on science which is also based on evolution.
Perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe you would go a witch doctor instead. peculiar universes by Halton Arp Intrinsic red shift observations Let's just face the truth about the universe? There is evidence that contradicts the theory of the Big Bang But if you're a scientist they don't want you to expose it Who said God didn't create the big bang? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2016 20:03:05 GMT -5
peculiar universes by Halton Arp Intrinsic red shift observations Let's just face the truth about the universe? There is evidence that contradicts the theory of the Big Bang But if you're a scientist they don't want you to expose it Who said God didn't create the big bang? possible but not likely, its hard to twist the creation story into the big bang theory... |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 30, 2016 20:34:08 GMT -5
Well let's see Let's begin with the hypothesis of evolution Are you going to tell us what problem you have with the theory? I see you standing and stamping you feet like an upset toddler who refuses to tell people what problem they are imaging. |
|
|
|
Post by Yes on Jan 30, 2016 22:30:28 GMT -5
Well let's see Let's begin with the hypothesis of evolution Are you going to tell us what problem you have with the theory? I see you standing and stamping you feet like an upset toddler who refuses to tell people what problem they are imaging. I really do have a lot to be very very thankful for. |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 30, 2016 22:30:51 GMT -5
Well let's see Let's begin with the hypothesis of evolution there are millions of problems with it that are swept under the rug that if acknowledged would support not only a perceived design but an interacting design (read Dr Don Johnson analysis ) If it is false it is deceiving call it what you will
Remember when I ask you if you became ill would you go to a modern physician and hospital?
You know, I suppose, that antibiotics are constantly having to change because the underlying cause, bacteria, -are constantly evolving to become resistant to the present day antibiotic.
That is just one evidence of how evolution is constantly affecting our everyday life. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2016 22:38:00 GMT -5
Well let's see Let's begin with the hypothesis of evolution there are millions of problems with it that are swept under the rug that if acknowledged would support not only a perceived design but an interacting design (read Dr Don Johnson analysis ) If it is false it is deceiving call it what you will
Remember when I ask you if you became ill would you go to a modern physician and hospital?
You know, I suppose, that antibiotics are constantly having to change because the underlying cause, bacteria, -are constantly evolving to become resistant to the present day antibiotic.
That is just one evidence of how evolution is constantly affecting our everyday life.I forget which period but in the fossil record there is a BIG lack of transitional fossils... |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 30, 2016 23:36:47 GMT -5
Would you name one of those "millions" of problems concerning evolution and tell us why it is "swept under the rug?"
Remember when I ask you if you became ill would you go to a modern physician and hospital?
You know, I suppose, that antibiotics are constantly having to change because the underlying cause, bacteria, -are constantly evolving to become resistant to the present day antibiotic.
That is just one evidence of how evolution is constantly affecting our everyday life. I forget which period but in the fossil record there is a BIG lack of transitional fossils...
You think about that while go finish the video that I am watching. |
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Jan 31, 2016 2:57:30 GMT -5
Another name: Spike Pssaris[] Sometimes their tactics adapt — dare I say evolve? —
to new situations (like when they changed their name from creationism to Intelligent Design), and sometimes they don’t.
Cherry-picking, taking things out of context, and deception are de rigueur [/
i]when it comes to astronomy.
Psarris has a series of videos out about creationist astronomy.
In them, he uses the term evolution to stir emotions in creationists, and not for what it actually means.
He then tried to squirm out of that, saying astronomers use the term evolution all the time
I then showed where he was being very deceptive there, trying to distract his readers away from the point that he blog font][/b][/font][/quote] Now it is also deceiving to say that all creationists have even heard about ID science, right? I do not think that ID scientists that subscribe to ID are deceptively using the term without changing the premise of creation event. IMO ID describes how we were designed and clot just the appearance of said design and there was an interactive agent coding information of the formation of said life |
|
?
.
just shows that even good people go bad.